doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Nope, still BS. Primarily, but not exclusively, because the attitude suggests that criticism=not liking the thing, which is a big steaming pile all by itself.
D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?
Nope, still BS. Primarily, but not exclusively, because the attitude suggests that criticism=not liking the thing, which is a big steaming pile all by itself.
Sacrosanct
Legend
You can say "BS" all you want, but it doesn't make it any more true. Unless you can actually point to anyone saying that you either must love it or you must leave it, what's BS is your earlier statement claiming that.
There are classes or subclasses that are awesome thematically, but they are really underpowered compared to all others. All the while some classes outclass them in every way.
Multiclassing is sort of the powerbuilders route, and i am sick of this as one of my group always multiclasses. I want to avoid it as much as i can.
Light armor loses out on heavier ones, especially on low levels, where you wont have high ability score to match the ac granted by medium or heavies. This is assuming point buy, which my group uses. I know that in real life, the more armor you got it was strictly better, but i dont want realism to my fantasy. Its the world of dragons and dungeons dangit!
Some stuff is really expensieve. Vial of acid is 25 gp, and it does 2d6 damage on a hit, none if you miss. Gold well spent?
Multiclassing is sort of the powerbuilders route, and i am sick of this as one of my group always multiclasses. I want to avoid it as much as i can.
Light armor loses out on heavier ones, especially on low levels, where you wont have high ability score to match the ac granted by medium or heavies. This is assuming point buy, which my group uses. I know that in real life, the more armor you got it was strictly better, but i dont want realism to my fantasy. Its the world of dragons and dungeons dangit!
Some stuff is really expensieve. Vial of acid is 25 gp, and it does 2d6 damage on a hit, none if you miss. Gold well spent?
Last edited:
CapnZapp
Legend
You don't know how fast D&D ducks fly.
S_Dalsgaard
First Post
Which ones do you mean? I haven't seen any real consensus on some classes being either under- or overpowered, and it certainly isn't my experience so far (admittedly I haven't seen every single class in play yet). There are for example many who say the beast master is bad, but I have seen several people say that it is fine and I wouldn't mind trying it out for myself at some point. It is true that all classes aren't equal at all levels, but overall I think they have hit a pretty good balance without resorting to the blandness that is 4e (IMHO, YMMV, etc.) For example the moon druid is bad a** at second level, but at other levels they are a bit behind.
Multiclassing is an optional rule, so it easy to disallow in your game (I have).
Light armor has several advantages: They are a must for stealth and they cost less, which is a big plus at lower levels. As most fighters won't have access to plate mail for several levels, I think it works perfectly.
You are not supposed to have easy access to acid (or poison). They are supposed to be for very special occasions, where they make sense to use, and not for continual ranged attacks. Besides, it probably wasn't easy to make acid in the middle ages, so the price reflects that.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Completely agreed here.
I'm about as far as you'll get from a 5e apologist, but...
1) Isn't multiclassing generally agreed to be a (*very*) weak option unless you're very, very sure about what you're doing? It delays most of the best benefits in the game (spell levels, extra attacks, ASI/feat choices), and doesn't give you things like armor proficiencies.
2) How do you figure, on the armor? If you're going Light armor, you want a Dex of at least 14, and preferably 16. That's +2 or +3 to your armor class. At level 1, the best heavy armor you can afford with starting cash is Chain Mail, which is AC 16. Studded Leather is just as easily acquired, and has AC 12+Dex, giving AC 14 or 15. You're (at worst) two points of AC behind--and, in the end, you'll have 12+5 = 17 vs. the flat 18 from heavy armor, which is crazy expensive if you need to buy it, and supposedly very rare to find in treasure (and, IIRC, it needs to be refitted which costs money too?)
I mean, yes, heavy armor's thing is that it's slightly better protection. It also comes with detriments (slowed, disadvantage on stealth, weight) and requirements (high Str rather than high Dex). It's not like it's just straight-up +1 AC for no loss--and it's not like Dexterity isn't still the best, or AT LEAST second-best, stat in the game by a long margin, especially given how kind 5e is to light-weapon users.
On the weak side, almost certainly Fighter (especially Champion) and Warlock (especially Pact of the Blade). Both of them are sensitive to campaign pacing and are at risk of a sort of "reverse" five minute workday problem because of the in-game length of time for a short rest. The Fighter, as usual, got seriously shortchanged for noncombat stuff; Battlemasters get a tool proficiency (because Know Your Enemy is about combat stats, nothing more) and Champions can jump a piddly bit further and get a +1 or +2 (for most of the game) to stuff they aren't proficient in (with most of the benefit being, again, to combat). The Warlock doesn't present itself very well, as the whole "quick route to power" thing often makes people (including myself) think that it should be more flashy and blastery, when it's really a master of very subtle magic/espionage and must treat its spell slots as a precious commodity, hoarded until the perfect moment. The Blade Warlock pretty much straight-up requires optimization to do its job, and leaves many things that probably should've been automatic as optional side-features.
I've also heard rumblings that Barbarians and Rangers (especially Beastmaster Rangers) are relatively lackluster, but nothing quite as clear, common, or repeated as Fighter and Warlock. I've also heard some more minor complaints about Rogues and Monks, but I cannot remember the details so that might have just been about a couple of lame features rather than more "global" weaknesses of the classes.
On the powerful side, Paladin and Druid are the major standouts. Paladins have a robust, solid baseline, and a bunch of really nice class-specific spells, and an aura which "breaks" (or, IMO, fixes) saving throws substantially, since it gives almost everyone (and always the paladin) effective proficiency in ALL saves...which STACKS with any proficiency the recipient might already have. I, personally, find the design painfully bland and far too copy-pasted from the Cleric, but I cannot deny the potency. And then you have Druids, who still have a nice and varied spell list, and Moon Druids particularly, with their beast forms. I agree that Moon Druids' power is "chunky" (or perhaps "digital" is a better word), but as I understand it they remain above parity for the majority of levels that most campaigns see (from 2 to ~9 or so, when most campaigns don't reach teen levels).
Of course, there's also the simple fact of "magic >> fighting" coming back in 5e; it's not exactly hard to be less "caster-supremacist" than 3e, and you can still have magic totally outclass other options while having magic toned down and non-magic toned up when compared to pre-4e versions.
Last edited:
I am not here to argue, i gave my 2 cents on thread subject and that is it.
S_Dalsgaard
First Post
Fair enough, I was just curious if you wanted to elaborate (which you clearly don't).
Nothing offensive meant, if i elaborate it may or may not ignite some heavy argumenting, which i dont want to start. Even on this very same page there already was calling out for BS and such.
Last edited:
Fralex
Explorer
25 gp is about how much I typically price cantrip scrolls, and 2d6 to a single target feels cantrip-level to me. Alchemist's fire, on the other hand, is way overpriced. For 50 gp, there shouldn't be such a big possibility that it will deal less damage than a flask of acid would. A scroll of the same price would deal around 2d10 damage to a single target. I make alchemist's fire deal 1d8 + 1d6 damage on the initial hit, and 1d6 on subsequent rounds.
That said, magic item pricing is weird, too, and it may well be that both things are overpriced. If you make the prices follow the exponential trend from start to finish, inserting midpoints so you get a price for each spell level, acid should cost 8 gp and alchemist's fire, 25.
Similar Threads
